Michaelf2225 wrote:these are the same people who call films with subtitles boring

no clue why people listen to Stuckmann, Jahns, Schmoes, etc.

I'll give some credit to Stuckmann for sometimes reviewing indie movies and stuff that's not just Marvel or Star Wars, but yeah. I don't get why people on the interwebs hold any of their opinions in such high regard.

This looks likely to be Nolan's best reviewed film on both RT and Metacritic.

98%
56/1
9.1

Spert wrote:4/4 from Seattle Times

Would be cool if everyone added the official reviews they find in the Official Reviews Thread, so I can add them to the first post with all the reviews

56/1 now.
9.1/10 and 98%

How many 100% scores at the moment? And what do you guys predict how many 100%s the film in the end will get?

tommyjon400 wrote:Why did that one guy give it a negative review on RT? I mean, he must have enjoyed it on some level. Did he do it just to seem hip?

His gripe was that he was expecting a standard war film with backstories, politics etc. This is perhaps the first "unconventional" war film ever, and that is why so many people like it I believe. Because the spectacle outweighs the unrealistic elements of most war movies, where someone is bleeding to death and someone stops to have a 5 minute conversation with them about their wife, etc.

My favorite critic, Peter Travers, has spoken!

The Oscar race for Best Picture is officially on. From first frame to last, Christopher Nolan's Dunkirk is a monumental achievement, a World War II epic of staggering visual spectacle (see it in IMAX if you can) that hits you like a shot in the heart.

Pioneerr wrote:How many 100% scores at the moment? And what do you guys predict how many 100%s the film in the end will get?

18 on MC I believe

From Travers via Rolling Stone:

'Dunkirk' Review: Christopher Nolan's WWII Epic May Be the Greatest War Film Ever

http://www.rollingstone.com/movies/revi ... er-w492668